kalishnikov wrote:Mr. New Admin, have you noticed all the old players that have left the site since you started making these "additions?" I have.

The game you are offering here resembles Risk less and less with each update and that's sad. I chose this site because all the others offering a game like Risk had too much unnecessary crap going on now this is the gimmicky one.

None of your changes you make actually add anything to the gameplay or strategy, all your doing is keeping the ADD generation occupied. You've made this site into the Call of Duty of Risk gaming; more focus on action, less on thinking and tactics.

Thank you for your feedback. I had not specifically noticed all the old players leaving, but I certainly hope they will come back. It is hard pleasing everyone, simultaneously. We have had a variety of updates for a variety of types of players. This will continue, including some more 'hard core strategy' updates as you seem to indicate you want. It is hard to know exactly what would please you, but if you have any specific suggestions, please take them to the Suggestions forum - I am extremely interested in enhancing gameplay/strategy. Bear in mind that some types of changes are harder than others and may take longer to arrive.

kalishnikov wrote:Mr. New Admin, have you noticed all the old players that have left the site since you started making these "additions?" I have.

The game you are offering here resembles Risk less and less with each update and that's sad. I chose this site because all the others offering a game like Risk had too much unnecessary crap going on now this is the gimmicky one.

None of your changes you make actually add anything to the gameplay or strategy, all your doing is keeping the ADD generation occupied. You've made this site into the Call of Duty of Risk gaming; more focus on action, less on thinking and tactics.

Wtf are you talking about? If your thing is just 1v1 on classic or whatever, then play only freaking 1v1 on classic. Stop shitting in the soup if 99% of the community enjoys having new stuff that no one is forcing you to play. If you re just here to complain about the adds then upgrade to premium. Do you work for free?? Well why do you expect others to do so?So who exactly are the "old players that left because of new additions?" Just curious how many names you can pull out!

Also a valid perspective! However, perhaps we should hear Mr kalishnikov out.

Personally haven't noticed any old players leaving that wouldn't have left anyway. Usually, disgruntled people will make their voices heard somewhere.

I welcome the changes, like the bot. It gives the option for newbies to play 0 points games. Maybe the bots are a bit like an autistic cook and could be a little harder to beat, but they're a start and it'll give new players some sort of practice.

The most likely thing that'll kill CC is not the vets leaving, but the fact that we're not retaining enough new people. I think the admins are doing it in the right order, regardless. Retain new members by introducing the simpler fixes like this, then enhance the game for the older players. There's no point enhancing a game with no players to play the improvements.

People are generally not too happy about the idea that one can play a bunch of games and win, then lose 2 games to noobs and lose all the points that was won + some. People are leaving because they get to a point where they are not having fun because they have to choose between playing only team games and retaining their rank, or risking 1000 points on a few hours of speed game fun. There needs to be something there to encourage older members to keep playing. They need to be able to play speeders without having to foe every cook on the server. lol. Now that we have 0 points games for noobs via the bots, I'd like to see a sort of optional limit that we can set when starting games. Say only people within a rank or 2 (above or below) can join my public games. Someone mentioned it before and I thought it was a good idea. It needs to be restrictive though, so one can't set it to only people higher than themselves or something stoopid like that.

00:33:53 ‹riskllama› will her and i ever hook up, LLT???00:34:09 ‹LiveLoveTeach› You and Shannon?00:34:20 ‹LiveLoveTeach› Bahahahahahaha00:34:22 ‹LiveLoveTeach› I doubt it00:34:30 ‹LiveLoveTeach› I don't think she's into farm animals

Shannon Apple wrote: Now that we have 0 points games for noobs via the bots, I'd like to see a sort of optional limit that we can set when starting games. Say only people within a rank or 2 (above or below) can join my public games. Someone mentioned it before and I thought it was a good idea. It needs to be restrictive though, so one can't set it to only people higher than themselves or something stoopid like that.

Use private games and/or the callouts thread. Or be the last person to join a game if you want to ensure everyone you play against is up to your standards. If you set rank restrictions, it will segregate public games into many factions where people cannot play against higher ranks and progress themselves.

If they did want to do something like this, I would only support something like Public Open and Public 2500+ games. Two tiers would be more than enough and 2500+ would be enough to keep the top players from losing a ton against a chef. Anyone < 2500 points would either have to work harder to get above 2500, or not complain. MAYBE one more break with a Public 1600+.

Shannon Apple wrote: Now that we have 0 points games for noobs via the bots, I'd like to see a sort of optional limit that we can set when starting games. Say only people within a rank or 2 (above or below) can join my public games. Someone mentioned it before and I thought it was a good idea. It needs to be restrictive though, so one can't set it to only people higher than themselves or something stoopid like that.

Use private games and/or the callouts thread. Or be the last person to join a game if you want to ensure everyone you play against is up to your standards. If you set rank restrictions, it will segregate public games into many factions where people cannot play against higher ranks and progress themselves.

If they did want to do something like this, I would only support something like Public Open and Public 2500+ games. Two tiers would be more than enough and 2500+ would be enough to keep the top players from losing a ton against a chef. Anyone < 2500 points would either have to work harder to get above 2500, or not complain. MAYBE one more break with a Public 1600+.

Or do what most of us do and don't join speed games too often.

00:33:53 ‹riskllama› will her and i ever hook up, LLT???00:34:09 ‹LiveLoveTeach› You and Shannon?00:34:20 ‹LiveLoveTeach› Bahahahahahaha00:34:22 ‹LiveLoveTeach› I doubt it00:34:30 ‹LiveLoveTeach› I don't think she's into farm animals

kalishnikov wrote:Mr. New Admin, have you noticed all the old players that have left the site since you started making these "additions?" I have.

The game you are offering here resembles Risk less and less with each update and that's sad. I chose this site because all the others offering a game like Risk had too much unnecessary crap going on now this is the gimmicky one.

With all respects, I disagree about that. The original Risk is not much of a strategy game. It features troops with unlimited stamina who can travel around the world without even stopping, magical increasing reinforcements that come from nowhere, troops that never need any kind of upkeep, among any other features that defy strategy, or at least, realistic strategy. Don't get me wrong, Risk is a nice game, but as a HUGE potential for improvement, and the more we evolve past Risk the better.

kalishnikov wrote:None of your changes you make actually add anything to the gameplay or strategy, all your doing is keeping the ADD generation occupied. You've made this site into the Call of Duty of Risk gaming; more focus on action, less on thinking and tactics.

I agree more with that part of your comment. Despite is good to see all those new improvements, the only that really made a difference for me are 12 player games. I can live without all the others. I do hope that we get more gameplay improvement updates soon.

Again, don't get me wrong. It's nice to see the clan pages, the bots are curious, but what is all that compared to gameplay improvements?

Last edited by OliverFA on Sat Sep 21, 2013 3:41 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Shannon Apple wrote: Now that we have 0 points games for noobs via the bots, I'd like to see a sort of optional limit that we can set when starting games. Say only people within a rank or 2 (above or below) can join my public games. Someone mentioned it before and I thought it was a good idea. It needs to be restrictive though, so one can't set it to only people higher than themselves or something stoopid like that.

Use private games and/or the callouts thread. Or be the last person to join a game if you want to ensure everyone you play against is up to your standards. If you set rank restrictions, it will segregate public games into many factions where people cannot play against higher ranks and progress themselves.

If they did want to do something like this, I would only support something like Public Open and Public 2500+ games. Two tiers would be more than enough and 2500+ would be enough to keep the top players from losing a ton against a chef. Anyone < 2500 points would either have to work harder to get above 2500, or not complain. MAYBE one more break with a Public 1600+.

IMHO the real issue is not playing against low-ranked players. The issue is that the scoring system has a very high volatility.

As a suggestion for the near future....would it be possible to get the pop-up map window on MAPS page to scroll with the list so that you're not up and down continually looking at the pop-up window which only open at the top of the page.

cairnswk wrote:Lots of great innovations being rolled out. Thank-you guys.

As a suggestion for the near future....would it be possible to get the pop-up map window on MAPS page to scroll with the list so that you're not up and down continually looking at the pop-up window which only open at the top of the page.

Thanks

Post this suggestion in the Suggestions Forum, bigWham wants all suggestions posted there so he can review all of them in one place!

cairnswk wrote:Lots of great innovations being rolled out. Thank-you guys.

As a suggestion for the near future....would it be possible to get the pop-up map window on MAPS page to scroll with the list so that you're not up and down continually looking at the pop-up window which only open at the top of the page.

Thanks

Post this suggestion in the Suggestions Forum, bigWham wants all suggestions posted there so he can review all of them in one place!

Say only people within a rank or 2 (above or below) can join my public games. Someone mentioned it before and I thought it was a good idea. It needs to be restrictive though, so one can't set it to only people higher than themselves or something stoopid like that.

There is often difficulty to fill speed games. Adding restrictions may make impossible to fill them.Best idea to make high ranked player playing speed game is points free games - with limitations of course. As suggested here :viewtopic.php?f=4&t=195748

Say only people within a rank or 2 (above or below) can join my public games. Someone mentioned it before and I thought it was a good idea. It needs to be restrictive though, so one can't set it to only people higher than themselves or something stoopid like that.

There is often difficulty to fill speed games. Adding restrictions may make impossible to fill them.Best idea to make high ranked player playing speed game is points free games - with limitations of course. As suggested here :viewtopic.php?f=4&t=195748

Oh, I know, I was one of the people that came up with that suggestion before it the discussion was moved there. With the introduction of bots, the 0 points thing has somewhat become a reality and it'll help new players. That was one of the things that a few of us were talking about before. If a player's first X amount of games were points free, they might be encouraged to stay. The bot is just a better version of that idea. I just wonder if a bot can be programmed to play better than those ones for intermediate players to practice on. I still like the 0 points option for inviting new players to come here and challenge me. I have some ideas surrounding that.

The reason there are little to no speed games is because officers don't want cooks and stripes joining their games, and you can't blame them. lol. I don't think putting a reasonable optional restriction when setting up games would prevent people from creating games at all. I think they'd create more of them and as a result, more activity. That's what we want here. A future for CC. Sure, we can go private and invite only people we know, but not everyone is in a clan, so a lot of people have a very limited pool.

Or... fix the points system and make it fairer. I think, sure, we should win less for winning against a cook. I think that system is great, but we shouldn't lose 50 points because they joined a game. I hate playing them in the first place, points or no points. I had one game this week that I really enjoyed. I lost, but it was the best game that I had played in a while because we were both forcing each other to think about our next move. Playing the other folk, win or lose, is no fun.

00:33:53 ‹riskllama› will her and i ever hook up, LLT???00:34:09 ‹LiveLoveTeach› You and Shannon?00:34:20 ‹LiveLoveTeach› Bahahahahahaha00:34:22 ‹LiveLoveTeach› I doubt it00:34:30 ‹LiveLoveTeach› I don't think she's into farm animals

greenoaks and the Entertainment Team bring you FOUR, count 'em, FOUR Official Bot Invasion Tournaments! Each tournament's winner gets 6 months of premium and a GA Medal!Find out more and sign up by clicking here!

sempai

High score: 2200 - July 20, 2015Game 13890915 - in which I helped clinch the NC4 title for LHDD